CINEMIL WRITEShttps://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com
Film discussions, short fiction, and personal blogsTue, 20 Mar 2018 01:48:24 +0000enhourly1http://wordpress.com/https://s2.wp.com/i/buttonw-com.pngCINEMIL WRITEShttps://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com
Top 25 Film Performances of 2017https://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/2017/12/30/top-25-film-performances-of-2017/
https://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/2017/12/30/top-25-film-performances-of-2017/#respondSat, 30 Dec 2017 17:04:50 +0000http://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/?p=789Continue reading Top 25 Film Performances of 2017]]>(Disclaimer: This list only consists of performances from films released theatrically in Philippine cinemas in 2017 and officially released in their countries of origin in 2017.)

It’s always been difficult for me to critique acting. A good performance can wear an infinite number of faces, but at the same time every good performance revolves around the same thing: truth. At the end of the day, as I compiled and ordered this list, it wasn’t necessarily these actors’ technical skill that put them above all the others. It was the heart they put on display, the authenticity of their emotions, and most importantly the ways they made their respective characters memorable and real to me. The featured actors this year range from up-and-coming stars who have found their niches, veterans who have found new outlets for their particular skill sets, underdogs who surprised us with their rawness, foreign actors who transcended the language barrier, and those who needed no words to tell a story.

A quick note: in the interest of full transparency, let it be known that I meant to include a certain Filipino actor quite high on this list. But I have opted not to, upon hearing that this person has conducted themselves inappropriately toward some student filmmakers I may know tangentially. I’d rather spare the details because it isn’t my accusation to make. But if you think someone’s missing on this list, there’s a chance it could be them.

Anyway, let’s do this.

25) ADRIENNE VERGARA as Lilibeth – Bliss

Jerrold Tarog’s Bliss is a psychological horror film that isn’t particularly scary in the traditional sense. But whenever Vergara’s mysterious nurse walks into a room, the very air seems to grow stale. Something is just off with Lilibeth—the way she speaks to Iza Calzado’s Jane Ciego, the way she borders on both abusive and seductive, the way she giggles in childish glee. It’s a profoundly disturbing performance that should be remembered.

24) ABRA as Hendrix – Respeto

I expected someone of Abra’s popularity to end up showboating in his first major film role. As this aspiring rapper and small-time drug dealer, however, he shows impressive restraint. For all of Hendrix’s attempts to appear macho and street hardened, he’s ultimately just a scared, confused little boy who has far more good in his heart than others are willing to believe. By giving an honest face to the vicitimized poor, Abra succeeds.

23) NONIE BUENCAMINO as Fr. Gus Saenz – Smaller and Smaller Circles

As a crime-solving Jesuit priest-slash-forensic anthropologist, Fr. Saenz is the closest thing Filipino cinema got to a true superhero this year. But Buencamino never forgets to give this man of God the most everyman qualities: he’s patient and diligent with an unflagging sense of humor, yet perpetually tired and fed up with those stopping him from doing honest work. It’s one performance I really wouldn’t mind seeing in multiple sequels.

22) IZABELA VIDOVIC as Via Pullman – Wonder

A third of the way through Stephen Chbosky’s family drama Wonder, sheepish older daughter Via begins to tell the story from her perspective, transforming this already sweet film into a thing of beauty. It only takes a matter of minutes for Vidovic to steal the show from her talented castmates. The 16-year-old actress crafts a character who is lonely and self-conscious, but overflowing with genuine love for her family. The tears are real.

21) JOSHUA GARCIA as Caloy – Love You to the Stars and Back

Of all the young Filipino actors who currently find themselves in their own love teams, Garcia has consistently proven himself to be far and away the most talented guy of his generation. He takes a well-worn trope (that of the cancer-stricken romantic) and reminds us why it works. As Caloy, Garcia runs the gamut from despair to pure selflessness, and roots every sentence in charm and vulnerability. Julia Barretto’s a lucky girl.

2017 was the year that Napoles, a staple jester in many a romantic comedy, truly earned his stripes as one of our best character actors. In the horror film Haunted Forest, he played a mentally ill witness to a murder. In the anthology film Triptiko, he played a menacing and legitimately terrifying cop. And in the rom-com The Write Moment, Napoles showed us the full range of his abilities, as a leading man both hilarious and compassionate.

19) MICHAEL STUHLBARG as Mr. Perlman – Call Me by Your Name

Some actors only need one scene to be remembered forever. Toward the end of Luca Guadagnino’s coming-of-age romance Call Me by Your Name, Stuhlbarg delivers a monologue that opens the floodgates of emotions being built up over the last two hours. As this gentle and intellectual archaeology professor, Stuhlbarg finds the tenderness hiding behind all of his character’s intelligence, and gives our hearts a collective hug.

18) ANDY SERKIS as Caesar – War for the Planet of the Apes

As long as the Academy refuses to recognize Serkis’s revolutionary performance capture work, I will continue to shout as loud as I can that he is one of the best actors working today. As the fearless leader of his society of apes, Serkis continues to find new emotional ground for Caesar. Here, we find him pushed to the brink, tempted to become the primal beast he has tried so hard not to embody, standing on the edge between human and animal.

17) MAJA SALVADOR as Carson – I’m Drunk, I Love You

In an alternate dimension where Salvador wasn’t famous, and JP Habac’s indie rom-com I’m Drunk, I Love You was her first role ever, this would’ve catapulted the actress to superstardom anyway. As the lovesick and punch-drunk Carson, Salvador becomes the embodiment of every college senior looking out into the mystery that is the rest of their lives. Playful, energetic, and brimming with heart, Salvador breathes new life into love.

16) PATRICK STEWART as Charles Xavier / Professor X – Logan

Who would’ve thought that Stewart—celebrated for decades as the ever-recognizable Captain Picard and Professor X—would still be able to show us a completely new side to himself? Gone is the sophistication and warmth from Charles Xavier; here, Stewart turns him into an old man filled with the most unbearable guilt, simply trying to live till the next day. Watching the world’s most powerful mind cave in on itself is excruciating, but astonishing.

15) CHUTIMON CHUENGCHAROENSUKYING as Lynn – Bad Genius

One of the biggest surprises of the year was a Thai thriller about students cheating in their exams, and Chuengcharoensukying became its confident, hard-edged, badass face. Though the subgenre of heist films often makes use of archetypal, one-note characters, Bad Genius‘s Lynn is anything but boring. Determined, in over her head, mischievous, and remorseful, she adds a rare level of nuance to a genre that needed just that.

14) VINCE VAUGHN as Bradley Thomas – Brawl in Cell Block 99

Perhaps no other actor this year exceeded expectations more than Vaughn did in S. Craig Zahler’s grindhouse prison odyssey Brawl in Cell Block 99. As the hardened ex-criminal Bradley Thomas, Vaughn is more force of nature than human being. He quite literally lumbers his way from one violent situation to the next, brutally pummeling down anything in his path. It’s a performance of almost pure physicality, and Vaughn sells all of it.

I’m giving this spot to both Kaluuya and Williams because their chemistry and the way they adapt to each other’s dynamic performances is simply undeniable. Together, they form one of the most likable movie couples of 2017, struggling to make it through the most awkward of situations. But as secrets are revealed, Chris and Rose become cold, desperate, animalistic, and calculating, taking us to the very edge of our cinema seats.

12) JOANNA AMPIL as Candida Marasigan – Ang Larawan

Already lauded for her achievements on the West End stage, Ampil completely steamrolled all competition at this year’s Metro Manila Film Festival in her portrayal of the fiery, rat-killing, barely-holding-it-together Candida. Armed with soulful eyes and an explosive voice, Ampil takes Nick Joaquin’s original material and takes it to the most emotional highs imaginable. Here’s to hoping we see more of her on screen; we need her.

11) BEN STILLER as Brad Sloan – Brad’s Status

Nearly everybody had written off Stiller as a one-trick pony, only ever playing a specific kind of person in many of his comedies and dramas. But in Mike White’s midlife crisis drama Brad’s Status, he reintroduces himself to us as a seriously powerful actor. As a self-loathing, self-destructive man constantly comparing himself to others, Stiller touches a nerve so raw and deep, you’d have to be dead not to respond. And the theater scene? Perfection.

10) EMMA STONE as Billie Jean King – Battle of the Sexes

In Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris’s sports biopic Battle of the Sexes, Billie Jean King is portrayed as tennis player second, and woman first. But instead of portraying the sports legend with the emotional depth of a Wikipedia article, Stone makes her leap off the screen. In her hands, King is undaunted, a ray of sunshine, and so absolutely in love that you begin to blush for her. Still, even with these qualities, Stone makes sure to expose the cracks in King’s confidence. As much as she takes pride in her own emancipation, she is nervous, scared of making the wrong move, of what people will say. And yet, she keeps playing.

As one of the most repulsive, backwards, racist characters to hit screens in 2017, Rockwell makes hating Officer Dixon almost too easy. However, at the risk of spoilers, halfway through Martin McDonagh’s pitch-black comedy Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, Rockwell takes Dixon on one of the most satisfying redemption arcs of the year. His spirit crushed and his face demolished, Dixon sets off to right the wrongs he helped make worse, expecting no forgiveness but risking life and limb anyway. And Rockwell is nothing short of captivating every step of the way.

8) AGOT ISIDRO / JOJIT LORENZO as Alex – Changing Partners

My favorite performances from Filipino actors in 2017 were from Agot Isidro and Jojit Lorenzo taking turns playing the same character in Dan Villegas’s musical romance Changing Partners. As the embittered older lover Alex, both actors spit out some of the most painful lines in local cinema this year both spoken and through song. But what makes this dual performance truly impressive is in the little nuances with which Isidro and Lorenzo play Alex. Lorenzo is exasperated, frantic; Isidro is articulate, exhausted. Both are extraordinary.

Turning in probably the angriest performance of the year is veteran actress McDormand playing a divorced mother seeking justice for the rape and murder of her teenage daughter. McDormand leaves all decorum at the door, blazing through this small town with no more sense of self-preservation. But she doesn’t make Mildred seem desperate, exactly—just finally fed up with a system that she believes has failed her. However, while McDormand’s rage is endlessly entertaining to watch, it’s in the moments of silence, when Mildred speaks to a deer or sits on a swing, when McDormand defies description.

6) NAHUEL PEREZ BISCAYART as Sean Dalmazo – BPM (Beats per Minute)

The first thing that impressed me about Biscayart was that I at first had no idea he was the protagonist of his own film. Never calling attention to himself, he starts out as just another member of his HIV/AIDS activist group stirring trouble in Paris. The next thing that impressed me was how he slowly began to transform, physically and emotionally. As Sean, he goes through the entire spectrum of what it’s like to live with a deadly disease, oscillating between total bliss and utter hopelessness, deteriorating but pushing himself by sheer force of will. It’s almost uncomfortable in its authenticity, and it’s pure inspiration.

5) DAFNE KEEN as Laura Kinney / X-23 – Logan

Some of us lower our standards when it comes to child actors. If they can act at least a bit convincingly, it’s impressive enough. But Keen went above and beyond the call of duty in portraying the feral young mutant on the run from the Reavers in James Mangold’s superhero Western Logan. She gives her older co-stars a run for their money as she slices through hordes of enemies, completely unblinking in her conviction. But even without the claws out, Keen is much better than you’d expect. She displays a toughness that never comes across as pretend, and eventually a softness of heart that you can believe was lying in wait the entire time. Keen creates a complete character, bloodied but unbroken.

4) DANIELA VEGA as Marina Vidal – A Fantastic Woman

It’s sad that actual trans actors are rarely chosen to play trans characters in both Hollywood and Filipino cinema. So how beautiful it is to see Vega, a trans actor from Chile, in Sebastian Lelio’s A Fantastic Woman. And how much more beautiful it is that she makes you stop thinking about her sex or gender just a few minutes in; she is simply an incredible actor. Marina is a woman of quiet resolve, even as prejudice continues to chip away at her exterior. But Vega is even better as a lover than as a fighter. Through her eyes, we witness as pure a love as there’s ever been, without any prejudice or politics. Don’t hesitate to give her a standing ovation by the end. She deserves it.

3) MATILDA LUTZ as Jennifer – Revenge

Ten months ago, Lutz played the lead in the abysmal horror sequel Rings. I wrote her off as a decent actor saddled with a bad script. I would like to apologize. Because in Coralie Fargeat’s exploitation thriller Revenge, Lutz turns in a performance that should (in a perfect world) be regarded as instantly iconic. With zero dialogue after the first 30 minutes, she grabs a rifle, brands a phoenix onto her stomach, channels Charlize Theron’s Furiosa, and becomes the very definition of a badass. It’s an intensely physical performance made all the more captivating by how Lutz never makes Jennifer invincible. She is naive, fragile, frightened—and even cooler because of it. Her wrath is glorious.

2) HUGH JACKMAN as James “Logan” Howlett / Wolverine / X-24 – Logan

Seventeen years ago, a then-unknown Hugh Jackman made comic book movie history by becoming the best Wolverine we could have ever asked for on screen. This year, he put his claws away for the last time, and delivered a performance unprecedented in its depth and nuance. In Logan, he redefines the movie superhero. Haunted, reclusive, and one step away from the end of his rope, this Wolverine doesn’t want to save the world. He just wants to be left alone. But in this, his final adventure, he finally finds the thing he’s been looking for since the beginning: home. A family. A chance to be something he can be proud of. And Jackman is nothing short of masterful here. Movies are all the better for him.

The greatest performances of 2017 come from the greatest film of 2017, Call Me by Your Name. As two young men who meet each other one summer in Italy, Timothee Chalamet and Armie Hammer slowly proceed to dig their fingers into your heart, then squeeze and tear and rip until you feel as if you’ve fallen in love for the first time all over again. With unbelievable chemistry and movements so measured, subtle, and precise, Chalamet and Hammer bring to life one of the purest romances these eyes have ever seen on screen. Their love burns slowly but surely, quietly but with unparalleled intensity.

This spot belongs to both actors, but individually, they’re still stellar. Even as Chalamet keeps a poker face, you can just barely make out his true feelings beneath his relaxed gestures and the skips in his steps. On the opposite side, even as Hammer exudes self-assurance and almost ignorant glee, there is just the slightest hint of hesitation and guilt when the music dies down. Together, they complement each other perfectly. There is so much raw, honest emotion on display here, that it’s a miracle that the actors and director Luca Guadagnino have been able to mold it into such a universally accessible form. Through Elio and Oliver, anyone can come closer to finally grasping the mystery of love.

Advertisements

]]>https://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/2017/12/30/top-25-film-performances-of-2017/feed/0cinemilwritesVergara.pngAbra.pngBuencamino.pngVidovic.jpgGarcia.pngnapoles.001.jpgStuhlbarg.jpgSerkis.jpegSalvador.pngStewart.jpgChuengcharoensukying.jpgVaughn.jpgKaluuya, Williams.jpgAmpil.pngStiller.jpgStone.jpgRockwell.pngpartners.001.jpgMcDormand.jpgBiscayart.jpgKeen.jpegVega.jpgLutz.jpgJackman.jpgChalamet, Hammer.jpgVIDEO REVIEW: First Filipino Movie of 2016!https://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/2016/02/01/video-review-first-filipino-movie-of-2016/
https://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/2016/02/01/video-review-first-filipino-movie-of-2016/#respondMon, 01 Feb 2016 16:34:40 +0000http://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/?p=769Continue reading VIDEO REVIEW: First Filipino Movie of 2016!]]>This year’s first local movie that I was able to see in theaters was the three-part anthology film adaptation of the popular book by the writing collective known only as Bob Ong. Lumayo Ka Nga sa Akin satirizes tropes in the Filipino action movie, the Filipino horror film, and the Filipino romantic comedy. Unfortunately, this film doesn’t get anywhere near the subversive quality of its source material. It’s a movie riddled with technical issues, annoying acting, and a wrong understanding of what satire is.

]]>https://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/2016/02/01/video-review-first-filipino-movie-of-2016/feed/0cinemilwritesVIDEO: 2016 Movie Highlightshttps://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/2016/01/27/video-2016-movie-highlights/
https://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/2016/01/27/video-2016-movie-highlights/#respondWed, 27 Jan 2016 15:07:56 +0000http://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/?p=751Continue reading VIDEO: 2016 Movie Highlights]]>We’re almost one full month into 2016, but it’s still fun to look ahead and see what the remaining eleven months have in store for us. Since I don’t really know how to measure my own anticipation, here’s a run-through of movies set to be released in 2016 that have piqued my interest. Take note that I am nervous about every movie that comes out ever, so I’ll always have my doubts. Here’s to a year of being proven wrong!

Context: Here in the Philippines, we don’t really get a lot of movies. Our online streaming services are nowhere near as content-rich as those in the United States. Our video stores’ selection of DVDs are bafflingly limited and seriously lacking in films released before the 2000s. Local movies (no matter how popular) that aren’t backed by major studios almost never get DVD releases after their theatrical runs (no matter how long). Television channels have a bad habit of showing the same movies for weeks on end, and of showing the same kinds of movies day-in, day-out.

And in cinemas, local mainstream film studios are lucky to release more than two films every quarter. The independent scene is staying strong, but indie festival runs are restricted to a select few theaters for one to two weeks–and then most of the entries never see the light of day again. Additionally, foreign film distribution isn’t as strong as I feel it could be. Once in a while we get gems like Boyhood or Whiplash, but most of the time we miss out on big awards contenders when they’re released in other parts of the world during the fourth quarter of the year (partially because of how the Metro Manila Film Festival effectively shuts down foreign film screenings for two weeks every Christmas). In their place, we get direct-to-DVD schlock and “movies” that seem like they were greenlit for theatrical runs by mistake.

But I’m simply setting the stage. This isn’t an article about film distribution in the Philippines, or the availability of movies in our video stores. What worries me is how this limitation of options for Filipinos makes piracy an easier choice. Some might even argue that pirating a film that will never be screened in the Philippines anyway isn’t as big a deal as pirating other films. But again, this isn’t an article about piracy in the Philippines. What I’m really worried about is how this culture of settling for online downloads and watching movies in the privacy of one’s home is robbing many of us of the beauty of the theater experience, and hindering us from developing theater etiquette and learning how to watch a movie.

It’s screener season. The nominations for the 88th Academy Awards were announced one-and-a-half weeks ago, but already a large number of Filipinos have seen a handful of the nominees–even if these movies never screened in Philippine cinemas in 2015. Thing is, a few of these nominees will be screened in early 2016–just in time for the Oscars. The Big Short is currently screening in many major cinemas, and we are set to receive Brooklyn, The Revenant, The Danish Girl, Spotlight, Joy, and Room before Oscar night.

But then it becomes difficult to convince people to sit and wait for these movies to be released (for measly one week-long runs, most likely) when they already have instant access at their fingertips through the Internet, and when most of them don’t necessarily put aside a lot of movie-watching money. I wouldn’t blame them. The holidays are over and work/school has resumed. By the time some of us find free time, these movies might be long gone from cinemas. I know the pain of missing a theater release and having to settle for a low quality stream instead.

But I can’t deny that there’s really just something special about sitting in a dark movie theater, and allowing a good film to completely enthrall you for two hours. In my opinion, the theater experience always enhances the quality of the film you’re watching (even if the movie is utter garbage, it’s still better garbage when seen in a cinema). That’s because theatrical releases are made to be seen on a big screen. Audio-visual elements are undoubtedly sharpened, and the theater environment makes the film a hundred times more immersive–which allows for story, direction, editing, and even acting to make a stronger impact. And I think that if you bring to the cinema the right level of commitment, then the film will reward you tenfold.

(Before I go any further, this article will not discuss television. I understand that TV is going through its own sort of Golden Age right now, and I am not saying that TV series or online shows are inherently of lesser quality just because they aren’t made for the big screen. There’s a world of difference between film and television, and I’d love to get into my thoughts on that subject–but at another time.)

First, let’s look at how the audio-visual elements of a film can become unbelievably enhanced in a movie theater setting. My favorite example when talking about this is Gravity (Alfonso Cuaron, 2013). The first and only time I ever watched Gravity was in a packed cinema in Greenhills Promenade (one of their fancy Dolby Atmos theaters, I believe). I remember being really scared that all these other people in the audience would just derail the experience for me by making noise and putting their feet up (more on that later). So imagine my surprise when–for practically the entire ninety-minute running time of the film–not one person spoke, and everyone seemed to stay perfectly still. The audience laughed when they were supposed to, they tensed up at the right moments, and they all seemed genuinely impressed by the time the credits rolled.

I have never watched Gravity in its entirety again because, in my opinion, it is a movie that can only be seen in a cinema. I go as far as saying that watching Gravity on TV or on a computer monitor is tantamount to watching a completely different movie altogether. Whether or not you take that as a judgment on Gravity‘s quality as a film is up to you (I personally still think it’s a masterpiece). My point is that Gravity was a movie very specifically created for the theater environment. Surround sound is put to expert use in the film; Sandra Bullock’s and George Clooney’s voices float in, muffled, from different directions, while the vastness of outer space isn’t heard so much as it’s felt through the sound design.

Most importantly, the blackness of the cinema (undisturbed by cellphone lights, mind you) erases the divide between screen and audience. During the film’s seventeen-minute opening shot, I immediately felt like I was actually in space. I felt like I was seeing stars even in my peripheral vision. Other people on the Internet have reported feeling something close to vertigo during the scene. You get the sense that you’re not just sitting in your seat anymore, but hurtling through space with the characters. Watching and listening to Gravity with earphones on may give you a bit of an idea of the theater experience, but I have to emphasize that actually being there–unable to escape the blackness of the environment and unable to disconnect your earphones–is something else entirely.

A little side note: 3D has become something of a punchline in modern-day blockbuster filmmaking. Most films, in my opinion, do not really utilize 3D well; they settle for the gimmick of objects reaching towards the screen. Not only does this gimmick rarely have anything to do with the story being told, but it ruins immersion by distracting the audience, instead of bringing them deeper into the world. Good 3D, in my opinion, has to do with depth. Films like Avatar, Life of Pi, and Mad Max: Fury Road all have gimmicky 3D moments, but they use 3D mostly to enhance depth–which helps viewers become more immersed and more appreciative of the world they’re in. George Miller’s Australian wasteland, Ang Lee’s endless ocean/spiritual landscape, and James Cameron’s lush planet of Pandora simply cannot come to life the same way outside the movie theater.

Another favorite example I have–this time for when I talk about the way movies utilize sound in a cinema–is The Babadook (Jennifer Kent, 2014). Many of the best horror movies in general are also some of the best sound-designed films of all time. And again, you can really only appreciate them in the environment where they were meant to be viewed. The Babadook, in particular, has a number of bone-chilling moments when static and audio distortion can be heard traveling from the left speaker to the right, or from front to behind. These audio cues do not have any onscreen source; there is no character or event making those sounds. They’re really just there, much like a film’s musical score.

And the effect is terrifying. During these audio distortion moments, I remember actually looking up, to my left, and to my right, to see if the sound was coming from inside the theater. The sound design of The Babadook is so good that it made me feel unsafe sitting inside a movie house. Watching the movie on a laptop with earphones on doesn’t come close. If you need another example of how effective the theater environment is when watching The Babadook, listen to Mister Babadook’s voice go, “Ba-ba. . . dooooook, DOOOOOOK, DOOOOOOK!” and imagine that sound coming from everywhere at full blast while sitting in the cinema. Refusing to look at the screen didn’t help. I still felt unsafe. And that’s the biggest compliment you can give a horror movie.

But wait a minute. The above examples so far have been very effects-driven. Of course they’d be better viewed in cinemas. But what about normal dramas? Comedies?

This point is a bit harder for me to articulate and give examples for, but I still also believe that relatively simpler movies that only really feature characters talking to one another can still be greatly enhanced by the movie theater environment. Take, for example, Before Midnight (Richard Linklater, 2013). Much like Before Sunrise and Before Sunset, the third in Linklater’s romance trilogy is made up mostly of mundane dialogue between the two leads as they walk around Greece. How does the darkness and surround sound of a theater make the experience richer? Simply put: the theater helps us focus on what’s going on. Watching a movie on a laptop does not get rid of the million-and-one distractions in your room. Watching something on HBO won’t stop someone from barging into your room and throwing you off from the story.

In a cinema, there is no escape from what is happening onscreen. Immersion is something many viewers take for granted, but is something that is key in maximizing a film’s potential effect on a viewer. Going back to Before Midnight: the film is a pretty light watch for the first half or so. Then at a certain point in the film, the viewers are subjected to a long, unbroken shot wherein now-married lovers Jesse (Ethan Hawke) and Celine (Julie Delpy) have an intense, heated argument in a hotel room. Watching this scene on TV or on a laptop isn’t fully immersive; the option to change channels, pause, stand up and do something else, or simply stop watching out of discomfort is always open. What the theater does is that it takes away those options. It forces you to confront the discomfort of seeing these two characters fight. And man, is it an intense argument.

That might sound like a small thing, but really think about it for a second: the theater environment actually forces you to experience a scene completely differently, because it demands attention, and denies pure detachment.

Another thing I want to bring up about “normal” movies that aren’t typically effects-driven or grand in scale is that many of the best dramas and comedies in film history still have very important audio-visual dimensions to them. Truly great films do not just toss aside elements like cinematography, production design, and musical scoring to be treated as secondary to acting and writing. There is just as much attention to detail to be found in them. Alexander Payne’s Nebraska (2013) can be viewed as a “normal” comedy-drama if you choose to focus on just the actors and the story being told. But what the theater does is that it allows you to really observe the film’s gorgeous black-and-white cinematography. The fact that the entirety of Nebraska looks like a series of fading photographs adds a whole other layer of poignancy to Bruce Dern’s character’s journey.

Yes, this same observation can be made on a small screen. But size really does matter. More importantly, immersion matters. Again, the fact that you are put into a dark theater in front of a large screen for a couple of hours forces you to consider more deeply the things being projected in front of you.

(Wait, hold on, before I say anything else, what about comedies? Well, comedies are a bit easier to appreciate in the theater setting: Gather together a group of friends and watch a funny movie with them in a cinema. Don’t tell me that the communal experience of being with them and being focused on the film doesn’t make things funnier. It does. It should.)

This is where learning how to watch a movie comes in. There really is an art to it (if not an art, then a recommended practice, at least). A movie will offer to you all these elements, and it is your responsibility as a viewer to try and take in the full picture. I know that sounds demanding, especially for self-proclaimed casual viewers. But it’s really not difficult, I promise. All it entails is attention, patience, and a reasonable enough level of respectful silence from the audience. You don’t “fail” or anything if you don’t pay complete attention to a movie. You just miss the opportunity to maximize the experience. You miss seeing the best possible version of the film–that best possible version being the one wherein you, the viewer, are fully immersed. Sometimes, it’s the viewer that makes the film great.

A photo I took at SM Marikina while watching Etiquette for Mistresses (Chito S. Roño, 2015). Those are an old woman’s feet wedged between two seats a meter away from me.

Unfortunately, it’s also the viewer that can totally ruin it for others. I won’t expound that much on my hate for rude theater etiquette (perhaps I could save my ranting for another blog post), but make no mistake that I really, really, REALLY hate rude, noisy, and annoying moviegoers. People who talk loudly and constantly with their seatmates during the film, people who answer cellphone calls inside the cinema, people who whip out their phones to check the time every so often (I myself am guilty of this, I’ll admit), people who surf the Internet when they get bored during a movie, people who narrate what’s happening onscreen (a favorite habit of Filipino audiences), people who put their feet up on the backrests of the seats in front of them, people who put their bare feet up on the backrests, people who snore inside the cinema, the list goes on.

What all these people have in common (and, again, I have also been guilty of a few of these offenses; I am not sparing myself) is that they inadvertently ruin the maximized experience that the other moviegoers could be having. They chip away at their immersion by adding a distracting element into the dark space of the movie theater. It is my dream that, one day, Philippine cinemas could enforce much stricter rules when it comes to theater etiquette. Have guards shine flashlights at people making noise. Eject those who commit multiple offenses. If I had it my way, I’d pause the movie altogether if somebody did something annoying. I know that’s going too far, but hey, just wishful thinking.

In conclusion, I would just like to help people rediscover the magic that a movie theater has to offer. The screening of a film like Gravity in cinemas was an event; people will literally never experience that movie the same way ever again. I’m very afraid that the dawn of online streaming services and the Golden Age of Television might hurt (if not totally kill) the beauty of conventional moviegoing in cinemas. So I implore everyone reading this–ESPECIALLY to those who have a habit of watching stuff mostly on their computers–to really go to the movies at least once in a while. And once you’re there, to actually pay attention, make the time spent worth your money, and to give the filmmakers the respect they deserve for working hard to give you a product on the big screen–a once-in-a-lifetime event.

To those who have seen screeners of some of the Oscar nominees, I invite you to watch those same movies again on the big screen when they come out in Philippine cinemas. I know it can be expensive to go to the movies. But I promise you that, if you maximize the theater environment (and if the movie you’re re-watching really is Oscar-worthy), you will be in for a completely different experience.

Advertisements

]]>https://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/2016/01/26/always-better-on-the-big-screen-preserving-the-theater-experience/feed/2cinemilwritesblog1blog2blog3blog4blog5Nebraskablog7blog8VIDEOS: Best and Worst Movies of 2015https://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/2016/01/23/videos-best-and-worst-movies-of-2015/
https://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/2016/01/23/videos-best-and-worst-movies-of-2015/#respondSat, 23 Jan 2016 15:13:27 +0000http://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/?p=437Continue reading VIDEOS: Best and Worst Movies of 2015]]>Working on a new (long) post and it’s been taking a while, so I’ve decided to keep this blog updated by sharing videos from my YouTube channel! Expect to see a lot of these kinds of posts. I will not be posting regular reviews on this WordPress site, since I’d prefer to keep my content varied across these different platforms.

Anyway, first up, here’s my own personal top 15 films of 2015! The list only contains films released in Philippine cinemas in 2015. Not as many big blockbusters as 2014’s list had, but lots of under-the-radar gems and excellent genre pieces.

Of course, what good would a best-of list be without a worst-of to complement it? Here’s my top 5 worst films of 2015 as well. This list is also only made up of films released in Philippine cinemas last year. I don’t find it very fun to talk about terrible movies, so I also attempt to articulate the deeper issues that I think these movies point to!

At the beginning of every self-proclaimed “epic novel” in the Captain Underpants series, two fourth graders named George Beard and Harold Hutchins present a crudely constructed comic book that explains their previous adventures and the origin of their mean school principal-turned-accidental-superhero, Captain Underpants.

In their comics, words are constantly misspelled, character models are drawn inconsistently, and none of the panels ever line up properly. And yet–reading these books as a fourth grader myself–I thought they were perfect. Back in 1997 when the series’ author, Dav Pilkey, published The Adventures of Captain Underpants, educators and librarians lost their minds, citing obscene content and miseducation that would make their students less intelligent and more naughty. But I thought to myself then (and I still think to myself now) that there was no other way it could have been done.

I read a lot of other books growing up: I was raised on Magic Tree House, got hooked on Animorphs, and collected Goosebumps books like crazy. But Captain Underpants remained my favorite. Though I didn’t know it yet, reading Dav Pilkey’s epic novels was the first time I learned that storytelling is just as much about the telling of the story as it is about the story being told.

I’ve always considered myself a storyteller. I know that sounds a lot like a cop-out way of saying I write, play music, and help out in film productions without the responsibility of having to take on the title of “author”, “musician”, or “filmmaker” just yet. But in all sincerity, I really feel as if I was born to become a storyteller. My mind looks for a story, or at least a sense of progression, in everything I see–be it a painting, a list of songs, or even the lines and patterns forever immortalized in blocks of marble.

So from my experiences with George and Harold I springboarded off into dreams of becoming an author myself. I drew my own comics about anthropomorphic fruits and wrote short stories about a roast chicken coming back to life, demanding to be eaten. In high school, my career path shifted: I joined an amateur cover band with a few of my friends and won a battle of the bands competition with songs by Franz Ferdinand, U2, and Rage Against the Machine.

But upon entering college, my career path shifted again when I discovered and really fell in love with film. It was a sucker punch that I wasn’t prepared for–and wasn’t prepared to let go of.

Backtrack to my grade school days: when I first started writing my own stories, I was surprised and challenged by how many things I had to take into account before putting words down onto the page (setting, point of view, character, language, etc.). I had to balance all these different impulses within me to produce something coherent. In a manner of speaking, when it comes to writing, I see myself as director, editor, cinematographer, actor, production designer, and sound engineer all at the same time. Even until today, writing continues to force me to collaborate with myself.

This sense of collaboration, of balance, of group puzzle-solving, also struck me when I first started playing music in high school. I still remember the exact moment when the band got together for the first time (I believe we played The All-American Rejects’s “Dirty Little Secret”), and I had an out-of-body experience: I looked at the four of us, each on different instruments, making wildly different sounds–but creating one unified piece of music together. That’s what got me.

And when I saw firsthand just how many people have to be involved in the creation of one short film, I was instantly mesmerized. There are so many more people on set than the finished product leads you to believe. And these are people who all speak totally different technical languages. In contrast, all writers can more or less draw from the same set of terms in order to critique each other’s work; all musicians have to be familiar with the very basics of rhythm, beat, scales, and other terms I won’t even pretend to fully understand.

But to call every single member of a film’s production crew a “filmmaker” is pretty much just lumping each of them under a vague umbrella term. A production crew is made up of people with extremely different skills and different titles. They don’t do what the other people on their team do. Even a director (while primarily responsible for his or her team’s synergy) can’t take command of every single role at the same time. Film by its very nature depends on collaboration. By extension, it depends on mutual trust. I would go so far as saying that I consider film the ultimate collaborative art.

(My friend made an interesting argument for video game development as the ultimate collaborative art. It’s a sound argument, but that’s another topic for another time.)

There was never really one movie that catalyzed my turning into a film lover. But I remember one day when someone pointed out to me how the music being played during the opening credits sequence of The Social Network (David Fincher, 2010) set the tone for all the other elements of filmmaking to come into play. As opposed to using some stereotypical early-2000s college/millennial song, composers Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross use a track entitled “Hand Covers Bruise”–it’s nothing more than a few notes on a piano underscored by electronic buzzing and deep bass notes.

And immediately, the scene transforms: the cinematography from Jeff Cronenweth suddenly becomes chilly and foreboding, Fincher’s direction becomes distant yet intimate, and Jesse Eisenberg’s performance becomes one of insecurity and loathing. Seriously, try playing any other song over the scene, and it completely changes. This was when I really thought to myself: all these filmmakers involved are really just storytellers coming together to share to each other how they would tell the story. And when they all come up with a unified vision, you’ll believe miracles can happen.

But after some time of being in the company of fellow film enthusiasts and filmmakers, I began to realize that there had to be more to my idea of this art form than just the image of people coming together to create things. There had to be a deeper reason for it. (Apologies in advance, since this next section may come off as very academic.)

The film organization I joined in college centers itself around what we call three core competencies: film appreciation, film critique, and film production. The issue with these facets that many of us began to notice was that film appreciation was being too easily equated with “watching movies”; critique with “talking about movies”; and production with “making movies”. So I opted to switch things up a little and aimed each of the core competencies at values to be gained: (1) film appreciation led to openness, (2) film critique led to respect, and (3) film production led to collaboration.

(1) From my perspective, openness can be gained through film appreciation when you begin to see the contexts in which a film is made. It’s easy to enjoy a movie solely for its entertainment value or aesthetic quality (neither of these things taken by themselves is bad, of course). But when you go beyond what’s on the surface and start looking for the end which all this entertainment aims to arrive at, or the deeper meaning or emotion that these aesthetic qualities point to, film can change. When you start thinking about the customs and cultures that exist in the countries of origin of foreign films, or the unique personal background of a filmmaker, film transforms into an extension–an expression–of these things.

My favorite examples for developing openness through film appreciation are horror movies. I know a few people who really can’t take horror, and that’s perfectly fine. It took me a very long time before I could understand how people could enjoy deliberately subjecting themselves to fear. And as I started watching more horror movies by myself, I began to understand that they are, at their very heart, just stories about fear. They’re still products of collaboration among filmmakers, but they use film’s elements (especially editing and sound) in different ways to achieve a different effect. Appreciating that helped me see yet another way of telling a story, and made me more game to check out different genres of film.

(2) I believe proper film critique can lead to respect because film reviews should always aim to be constructive. Not only should a moviegoer be able to decide on what movie to watch based on reviews, but the filmmakers themselves whose work is being critiqued should have an idea of what to stop doing, start doing, and continue doing after reading a review. It is a critic’s responsibility to have enough respect to put time and thought into evaluating the filmmakers’ product in a more-or-less objective fashion. Even if a critic hates a movie, he or she still shouldn’t be reduced to insults and name-calling. Even artists who fail deserve to really know why they did. A bad decision is usually a result of good intentions.

For example, my own personal, completely subjective pick for favorite film ever is Dead Poets Society (Peter Weir, 1989). It’s the movie that has affected me and continues to affect me the most out of everything I’ve seen–but I will be the first to say that it is flawed. One of its bigger flaws is its depiction of adults as extremely strict and harsh. (I know that the story of Dead Poets Society is set in the 1950s, but I still don’t consider that enough of an excuse for the near-caricatures that some of these characters become). But I firmly believe that this kind of imperfection was deemed a good idea during pre-production because it would help us sympathize more with the students.

(3) I’ve spoken enough about collaboration and film production as a process of mutual trust. But just to go a little further, I also believe that film production can help inspire a more collaborative work model in general. The great thing about film for me is that rarely can anyone make it on their own. Every single person on a production team has to give their all for any chance of their film to become as successful as possible. Every single person is just as important as everyone else. Additionally, a constant check-and-balance is required in order to ensure that the team’s vision stays unified all the way through to post-production, marketing, and release. Lord knows how much some of our leaders need to know this.

Through all these things–storytelling, the core competencies, respect, openness, and collaboration–the experience of watching a film has become transcendental for me. Going to the movies or watching a television show has become something of a spiritual experience because all these ideas I have of film have combined (like a little production team in my head) and have helped make each viewing experience richer. To squeeze in another example: watching an episode of Breaking Bad (Vince Gilligan, 2008-2013) has become an examination of my own response to violence and amorality. I know that that sounds boring and un-fun, but it’s preeetty fun for me.

Film has helped me find a place in life. It has helped me define my role in relation to other people. As sentimental and cheesy as that sounds, I believe it to be true. I recognize that a group unified is capable of creating something greater than themselves. I recognize that I am just as fundamentally important as other people. Film has helped me see that my way of telling the story is only ever one side of it all.

While my ultimate dream is to become a screenwriter or to become a recognized film critic, the underlying intention there is to help others through film and to develop in others the values that film continues to teach me. But the difficulty is art’s perceived impracticality (especially in a third world country like the Philippines) and the lack of proper support it’s given to truly flourish. Still, I remain firm in my belief that art can cross boundaries and bridge gaps. Art may not directly change the world, but it can change people. I’ve forgotten where I got this quote, but I still stand by it: “great art takes what we already know and makes us feel it.”

To end, I will leave the floor to the late film critic Roger Ebert, who has already said everything that I’ve ever wanted to say, but much more succinctly: “[T]he motion picture […] is the art form that creates more empathy than any other. It creates our ability to step out of our own shoes. One of the marks of civilization is to be able to somehow step outside your own mind and your own experience, and understand what it is like to be a person of another race, another age, another gender, another nationality; to have different physical capabilities, to have different beliefs.

“And when I go to the movies–for two hours at least–I have an out-of-the-body experience. If the movie is working for me, to some degree I am that person on the screen[…]. I am having vicariously an experience that happened to someone else, and that makes me a better person, or it can make me a better person. And I sincerely believe that to see good films, and to see important films is one of the most profoundly civilizing experiences that we can have as people.”

In short, I just I really, really, really love movies. Welcome to my blog!

Advertisements

]]>https://cinemilwrites.wordpress.com/2016/01/01/why-i-love-movies-an-introduction/feed/0cinemilwritesWP1The Social Network5.0.2wp4